Jump to content

Texas at it again


Recommended Posts

ok lets talk about NY how bad is the crime there ? seeing how hard it's to get a gun

The U.S. Constitution and the constitutions of 46 states protect the right to arms and/or self-defense. And since 1986, federal law has protected the right to transport firearms in vehicles interstate.

A business owner`s private property rights are not affected by a law preventing the micro-management of the lawful contents of a person`s privately-owned automobile. Moreover, an employer`s private property interests do not trump a person`s right to have a firearm available for self-defense, if needed, during the daily commute to and from work. As with all civil rights, employers and owners of commercial property may not act with disregard to the rights of citizens. Reasonable accommodation is the foundation of the protection of all civil rights.

A commercial landowner is subject to numerous limits, imposed by the federal, state and local governments, on what may and may not occur on its property.

Employees have a legitimate private property interest where their automobiles and their contents are concerned. In our legal system, property rights extend to property other than land.

Most gun-related violent crimes in workplaces are committed by non-employees. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 84% of all workplace murders are committed by strangers; 7% are committed by current or former employees.Naturally, strangers and former employees are not bound by any company policy pertaining to employees.

Anyone determined to commit a violent crime will not be prevented from doing so by a mere company policy against having guns in cars. This should go without saying, since criminals are already willing to break laws against murder, rape, robbery and assault.

Laws protecting the right to leave firearms in locked motor vehicles do not authorize a person to have a firearm outside his or her vehicle.

Laws protecting the right to leave firearms in locked motor vehicles on business property specifically protect the property owner from liability for any related injuries or damages. Also, if a business prohibits people from possessing the means to defend themselves in their vehicles, it is potentially liable for injuries and damages incurred for failure to provide adequate security.

The problem of workplace crimes has been exaggerated. The nation`s violent crime rate has declined every year since 1991 and is now at a 30-year low, the murder rate is at a 39-year low, and workplace violent crime has decreased more than violent crime generally. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health says, "the circumstances of workplace homicides differ substantially from those portrayed by the media and from homicides in the general population

Violence in the Workplace, 1993-1999," Dec. 2001 (www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/vw99.pdf). The study also noted, the highest percentage of work-related murders occur between 8p.m.-12 a.m., when most businesses are closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yeah, you know why its so hard to find a good basic? Because the very best are called paramedics, that's why. Anyway, lets not quibble over who can figure out how to put the NRB on quicker.

I'm not going to quibble with your statistics. I would say that the 80% of workplace murders occuring by outsiders is probably about right, because if you think about it, a lot of convenience stores are workplaces, and a lot of them get held up and Achmed takes a few rounds to the chest. What exactly this has to do with people having guns in their cars is beyond me.

Anyway, you really need to start with proper punctuation and spelling before moving on to beating your chest over what a good basic you are or how guns really save lives, and not get people killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To say that a higher or lower crime rate between locations is only because guns weren't banned or guns were banned is a bad way to interpret statistics, since there are an INCREDIBLY large number of confounding variables.

But if you really want to,

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/

Index is supposedly the sum of violent crime, property crime, murders, forcible rapes, robberies, aggrevated assaults, burglaries, larcenies, and vehicle thefts.

Since the Index doesn't really add up, I added my own category (Sum), which is the sum of all columns besides year, Population, and Index. Coincidentally, it equals the Index*2, counting rounding error. Looks like someone accidentally inputed the average-of-two-values formula instead of the sum formula.

Data for 2005

TX

Population: 22,859,968

Index: 1,111,384

Index/Population: 0.048617041

Sum: 2,222,768

Sum/Pop: 0.097234082

NY

Population: 19,254,630

Index: 491,829

Index/Population: 0.025543415

Sum: 983,658

Sum/Pop: 0.05108683

CA

Population: 36,132,147

Index: 1,390,710

Index/Population: 0.038489548

Sum: 2,781,419

Sum/Pop: 0.076979068

KY

Population: 4,173,405

Index: 128,114

Index/Population: 0.030697716

Sum: 233,118

SumRatio: 0.055857986

Of course, none of this actually means anything besides the number of crimes and the population. It tells nothing of the reasons, conditions of living, economic status, percentage of people under poverty line, etc.

Edit: I just realized the Sum value for Kentucky does not equal twice the Index value and for the life of me I cannot figure out why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I'm feeling up to it, I'll look up the violent crime rate in NYC, but with a 70% drop in the past 10 years, its a lot safer than a lot of places, and if you took the per capita crime rate, it would be a lot lower than most. When was the last time there was a school shooting in New York? Its been quite a while. Sure, knifings, they happen, beat downs, yep, but shootings, really honestly, that's more of a Colorado phenom. The thing is, which is my point, you'll have a much better chance of walking away from a knifing or a beat down than a shooting. A shooting, at least, you're gonna lose function of something before the day is over.

You know, on a side note, the Justice Department is really starting to piss me off. I'm trying to download some stats and they want me to order their products. Hey, I pay my goddamn taxes, make with the figures already. Maybe they're too busy firing non-good-Bushies. Oh, snap...

One interesting thing I found out though, did you know that NICS background checks for the purchase of firearms only apply to non-licensed gun owners? Yep. So, if you have a carry concealed license, you can buy all the guns you want, and not even have your background checked. Sure hope you haven't commited any crimes in between getting the license and buying the gun, because, who would know, eh? God Bless America! YEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAHHHHH!!!! BANG! BANG! BANG!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Asys, let me ask you, or other gun-prohibitionists, if you think this is a fair question.

I can easily imagine a situation in which I would wish, even if only for a moment, that a gun had not been legally available to someone who used it for a bad purpose, say on me or someone I cared about. That is, I can imagine passionately feeling, at least for a while, that legal gun-ownership was not worth the shooting of an innocent victim by someone legally possessing a gun.

Now, can you imagine a situation in which you wished a gun had been legally available to you or someone you cared about, and if so, what do you do with that wish? That is, a situation in which you say, Gee, I wish I'd had the right to possess a gun; it could have saved an innocent life. Do you talk that wish down by saying, Well, although I/someone I cared about was killed by a criminal who walked away because I was denied permission to possess a gun, the loss innocently suffered was worth paying in exchange for the generally safer public that gun-prohibition promotes?

I ask because I'm trying to think through both sides of the topic. If you think the question needs to be reframed, please reframe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Michael, I've got a question for you. Can you imagine a situation in which you wish you carried an AED around? or an epi-pen? or a pocket mask?

Now, how many people do you know that DO carry around medical equipment?

As I said before, in my opinion, the necessity of a gun is very situational. Me, I should never carry a gun because I'm extremely implusive, have no self control, and live in an area where the likelyhood of needing a gun is something like 1/n as n approaches infinity. (Both when I'm at my college dorm and when I drive back home.) I would feel safer without a weapon that could cause instant death than with one.

So in summary, yes, I can imagine a situation where I wish a gun would be available to me or someone I know. However, the likelyhood of such an event in my life is extremely unlikely. Likewise, I can imagine a situation where I wish a gas mask, an defibrillator, a stick of dynamite, a fire-extinguisher, or a parachute would be available to someone I know.

Although, the number of people who live in a situation such as mine is not the highest, to say the least. I didn't realize that there was 1 violent crime per 13 people every year in california.

So assess the amount of risk there is in your life and decide for yourself whether it would be a good idea to have a gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So assess the amount of risk there is in your life and decide for yourself whether it would be a good idea to have a gun.

That's really the bottom line that the carry proponents have been saying all along.

If you can concede that point, then I don't see what the dispute is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, that sentence only works as an advisory statement and will never be workable as legal code, because

1. It assumes that all people are reasonable. (Whereas I used it in addressing Michael and I'm relatively certain that he's a reasonable person.)

2. It does not address when and where you are allowed to use your gun, which is the subject on which this thread was started and on which legislation was recently passed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...